Desmond Tutu says he wouldn't want heaven if God condemns gays. How about you?

[Blue3]

How strongly do you feel about it?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Or for another thought example... let's say God condemns:
*people who participated in mixed-race marriages,
*women who think and conduct themselves as equals to men,
*people who "stole" slaves by freeing them,
*people who ate pork and shellfish,
*people who drank alcohol,
*and anyone who ever protested or rebelled against their government.

Would you still worship that God?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Desmond Tutu has always been an role model of mine in my spiritual (and someday to be ministerial) life.  I share his sentiments entirely, as I abandoned the whole "God hates gays/gay behaviors/people who aren't like me" stuff many years ago.  I am just not capable of having a personal relationship with a God who condemns homosexuals, and if the God I've come to know all these years turns out to be the wrong one, well, then damn me to hell.

[Del Tachi]

I wouldn't want heaven if God lets Desmond Tutu in after that...

[TDAS04]

Tutu is a true FF, as is Mandela.  They consistently fight for social justice and equality.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

His Will Be Done. Is Mr. Tutu alleging that, were God to be "homophobic", there would be a moral judgement beyond God's? Doesn't that void the entire concept we have of the Christian God? And with Hell being defined as total and utter separation from God--thus resulting in all sorts of awfulness without His presence--Tutu would be dooming himself quite much to opt out of heaven.

[DC Al Fine]

Desmond Tutu has always been an role model of mine in my spiritual (and someday to be ministerial) life.  I share his sentiments entirely, as I abandoned the whole "God hates gays/gay behaviors/people who aren't like me" stuff many years ago.  I am just not capable of having a personal relationship with a God who condemns homosexuals, and if the God I've come to know all these years turns out to be the wrong one, well, then damn me to hell.

Tutu's position is problematic; not his view on homosexuality, so much as his notion of not wanting to worship _____ God. As Cathcon said, there is no moral judgement above God (in the Christian view). As fallible, fallen humans it is unsurprising that our moral views sometimes come into conflict with God's.

By rejecting "homophobic God", Tutu is echoing Satan in Paradise Lost "Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heav'n."; rejecting God in favour of rebellion. This is very different that arguing that God is ok with homosexuality, it is much deeper and much more dangerous than that.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Agree 100%. Tutu is a Freedom Fighter in the literal sense of the term.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

His Will Be Done. Is Mr. Tutu alleging that, were God to be "homophobic", there would be a moral judgement beyond God's? Doesn't that void the entire concept we have of the Christian God? And with Hell being defined as total and utter separation from God--thus resulting in all sorts of awfulness without His presence--Tutu would be dooming himself quite much to opt out of heaven.

A homophobic God would void the entire concept progressive Christians have of Him, yes.  I don't know if I'd say Reverend Tutu is arguing that there is a moral judgment beyond God, but rather that if God's kingdom is a homophobic place and homophobia is one of the moral judgments, then he'd want no part in it.  In other words, all his advocacy of equal rights would have been for naught.  And personally, I can't blame him for feeling that way.  If you found out that God thought killing kittens and kicking babies was the right thing to do, what would your reaction be to that?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Desmond Tutu has always been an role model of mine in my spiritual (and someday to be ministerial) life.  I share his sentiments entirely, as I abandoned the whole "God hates gays/gay behaviors/people who aren't like me" stuff many years ago.  I am just not capable of having a personal relationship with a God who condemns homosexuals, and if the God I've come to know all these years turns out to be the wrong one, well, then damn me to hell.

Tutu's position is problematic; not his view on homosexuality, so much as his notion of not wanting to worship _____ God. As Cathcon said, there is no moral judgement above God (in the Christian view). As fallible, fallen humans it is unsurprising that our moral views sometimes come into conflict with God's.

By rejecting "homophobic God", Tutu is echoing Satan in Paradise Lost "Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heav'n."; rejecting God in favour of rebellion. This is very different that arguing that God is ok with homosexuality, it is much deeper and much more dangerous than that.

Well, if believing in equality is rebelling against God, then I guess the Reverend and I are destined for a not-so-nice place when we die.

(I should note that I'm saying this as someone who doesn't believe in a Hell or "other place" for people whose morals differ from God's.  I can only speak for myself on that, of course.)

[DC Al Fine]

Desmond Tutu has always been an role model of mine in my spiritual (and someday to be ministerial) life.  I share his sentiments entirely, as I abandoned the whole "God hates gays/gay behaviors/people who aren't like me" stuff many years ago.  I am just not capable of having a personal relationship with a God who condemns homosexuals, and if the God I've come to know all these years turns out to be the wrong one, well, then damn me to hell.

Tutu's position is problematic; not his view on homosexuality, so much as his notion of not wanting to worship _____ God. As Cathcon said, there is no moral judgement above God (in the Christian view). As fallible, fallen humans it is unsurprising that our moral views sometimes come into conflict with God's.

By rejecting "homophobic God", Tutu is echoing Satan in Paradise Lost "Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heav'n."; rejecting God in favour of rebellion. This is very different that arguing that God is ok with homosexuality, it is much deeper and much more dangerous than that.

Well, if believing in equality is rebelling against God, then I guess the Reverend and I are destined for a not-so-nice place when we die.

(I should note that I'm saying this as someone who doesn't believe in a Hell or "other place" for people whose morals differ from God's.  I can only speak for myself on that, of course.)

This isn't about homosexuality or who's going to heaven/hell. The question is whether God is the ultimate arbiter of morality.

If you told me "God forbids alcohol", I could answer with "no he doesn't" or "God is wrong, f[inks] what he thinks". The second answer is a much more serious error than the first one. I don't really care what Tutu's thought's on homosexuality are, but by rejecting this hypothetical "God's view" he is effectively saying he has higher moral authority than God, and that is what I am alarmed at.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

His Will Be Done. Is Mr. Tutu alleging that, were God to be "homophobic", there would be a moral judgement beyond God's? Doesn't that void the entire concept we have of the Christian God? And with Hell being defined as total and utter separation from God--thus resulting in all sorts of awfulness without His presence--Tutu would be dooming himself quite much to opt out of heaven.

A homophobic God would void the entire concept progressive Christians have of Him, yes.  I don't know if I'd say Reverend Tutu is arguing that there is a moral judgment beyond God, but rather that if God's kingdom is a homophobic place and homophobia is one of the moral judgments, then he'd want no part in it.  In other words, all his advocacy of equal rights would have been for naught.  And personally, I can't blame him for feeling that way.  If you found out that God thought killing kittens and kicking babies was the right thing to do, what would your reaction be to that?

I wouldn't necessarily be happy about that. However, if God is the ultimate good in all of creation, as surely He must be if He is the creator of all of it, who is a human to question it? Questioning it implies God could be wrong, and thus subject to a judgement higher than His own.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Job 38:1-15

Then the Lord addressed Job out of the storm and said: "Who is this that obscures divine plans with words of ignorance? Gird up your loins, like a man; I will question you, and you tell me the answers! Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its size, do you know? Who stretched out the measuring line for it? Into what were its pedestals sunk, and who laid the cornerstone, while the morning stars sang in chorus and all the sons of God shouted for joy? And who shut within doors the sea, when it burtst forth from the womb; when I made the clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling bands? When I set limits for it and fastened the bar of its door, and said: Thus far shall you come but no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stilled! Have you ever in y our lifetime commanded the morning and shown the dawn its place, for taking hold of the ends of the earth till the wicked are shaken from its surface? The earth is changed as is clay by the seal, and dyed though it were a garment; but from the wicked the light is withheld, and the arm of pride is shattered.

I could go on, but I think the general point is made.

[Blue3]

So if there was someone more powerful than God, then it would be ok?

Might makes right?

[TJ in Oregon]

So if there was someone more powerful than God, then it would be ok?

Might makes right?

Perhaps, but by that point you have something far enough from Christianity it becomes hopeless to use Christianity to describe.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

So if there was someone more powerful than God, then it would be ok?

Might makes right?

Christ... Ignoring the point of said "might". The Christian understanding of God is that He has created everything. Without God, there is beyond nothingness as there is no one to even call it nothing. God, the Alpha and the Omega, is all that there is and everything is within Him and subject to His judgment. To say that God is "wrong" in that sense is to make God subject go judgment higher than His own. If there were authority higher than Him, that would of course make God a lesser being, and thus void the Christian understanding of Him.

[Blue3]

This thread isn't limited to Christian understandings of God, people. Tutu was obviously referring to an Abrahamic God, but this thread is not limited to that.


Also, what gives a Creator the right to judge or rule his/her creation?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

This thread isn't limited to Christian understandings of God, people. Tutu was obviously referring to an Abrahamic God, but this thread is not limited to that.


Also, what gives a Creator the right to judge or rule his/her creation?

If one happens to be the creator of all that ever was and ever shall be, whose judgment would they refer to but their own? There is not set of "natural laws" existing in what is not created, is there? God doesn't have a higher morality refer to because there is no higher morality--assuming the previous understanding--and thus we are subject to His judgment, not to the judgment of Baal or whathaveyou. God doesn't have to stop and think and wonder "is it okay if I kill people?" There is nothing but Him determining that.

[Del Tachi]

Job 38:1-15

Then the Lord addressed Job out of the storm and said: "Who is this that obscures divine plans with words of ignorance? Gird up your loins, like a man; I will question you, and you tell me the answers! Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its size, do you know? Who stretched out the measuring line for it? Into what were its pedestals sunk, and who laid the cornerstone, while the morning stars sang in chorus and all the sons of God shouted for joy? And who shut within doors the sea, when it burtst forth from the womb; when I made the clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling bands? When I set limits for it and fastened the bar of its door, and said: Thus far shall you come but no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stilled! Have you ever in y our lifetime commanded the morning and shown the dawn its place, for taking hold of the ends of the earth till the wicked are shaken from its surface? The earth is changed as is clay by the seal, and dyed though it were a garment; but from the wicked the light is withheld, and the arm of pride is shattered.

I could go on, but I think the general point is made.

One of my favorite sections of scripture.  Really shows how ignorant Tutu and all others like him are. 

[barfbag]

I'm an extremely educated individual on the history of religion. I'm not sure what liberal cause Desmond Tutu is trying to pull off this time, but God doesn't have a political party and loves all of God's children. If for whatever reason, God condemns gays, then it's not for me to disagree with or anyone else for that matter.

[Blue3]

This thread isn't limited to Christian understandings of God, people. Tutu was obviously referring to an Abrahamic God, but this thread is not limited to that.


Also, what gives a Creator the right to judge or rule his/her creation?

If one happens to be the creator of all that ever was and ever shall be, whose judgment would they refer to but their own? There is not set of "natural laws" existing in what is not created, is there? God doesn't have a higher morality refer to because there is no higher morality--assuming the previous understanding--and thus we are subject to His judgment, not to the judgment of Baal or whathaveyou. God doesn't have to stop and think and wonder "is it okay if I kill people?" There is nothing but Him determining that.

Who says judgment is necessary at all?

Why would it be wrong for a Creator to discuss things with his/her Creation?

Why does the "higher morality" have to be the morality of the one who existed first, or is most powerful?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's the thinking people he created that could also come to their own moral conclusions, and do.

At one point, God probably still had to think about what is right and wrong... or are you completely adopting "might makes right"?

And what if God were to change his mind? Would that mean he was wrong before? Or would it be right no matter his position?



I'm trying to get you and others to really question assumptions with these hypotheticals, not saying I personally agree with any, just trying to generate good discussion.

[TJ in Oregon]

The premise of Tutu's quote was in the context of a Christian God (which I am assuming is what Progressive Christians subscribe to). In that sense the God in question is omnipotent and infinitely good. A way of considering the Christian construction of this is to consider Thomas Aquinas's 4th proof of the existence of God. While I think it's an argument so abstract few people will find convincing for God's existence, it does describe how Christians view God, as a source of infinite goodness. Thus in the context of Christianity it makes no sense to ponder what gives God the authority to decide morality or to judge. God is goodness; God is morality; God is love.

If we widen the discussion outside the realm of Christian thought I think before we can ask why God has the power to determine right and wrong, we have to first establish what understand of God we're considering. We can't hope to understand what position God would be in to determine morality if we can't first have a framework of understanding for who God is.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I agree with Archbishop Tutu on the substance of the issue at hand but I see the same danger in his expression of it here, and what it implies about his views on the foundation of morals, that our conservatives see. Tutu has not to the best of my recollection been known as a John Shelby Spong-type Christian in name only, so I can only hope that this is a temporary lapse of articulacy or judgment rather than indicative of something more serious going on in his thought.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

This thread isn't limited to Christian understandings of God, people. Tutu was obviously referring to an Abrahamic God, but this thread is not limited to that.


Also, what gives a Creator the right to judge or rule his/her creation?

If one happens to be the creator of all that ever was and ever shall be, whose judgment would they refer to but their own? There is not set of "natural laws" existing in what is not created, is there? God doesn't have a higher morality refer to because there is no higher morality--assuming the previous understanding--and thus we are subject to His judgment, not to the judgment of Baal or whathaveyou. God doesn't have to stop and think and wonder "is it okay if I kill people?" There is nothing but Him determining that.

Who says judgment is necessary at all?

Why would it be wrong for a Creator to discuss things with his/her Creation?

Why does the "higher morality" have to be the morality of the one who existed first, or is most powerful?

Morality in the context of religion--especially Christian religion. God knows the Greek gods were amoral hedonists--is an attempt to be in sync with one's creator. It is an attempt to imitate the deity's ways and to do as the deity wishes. In the whole, it is an attempt to find the very way of life and set of ethics the creator of the entire universe has set for his creation. There is no truer model than the creator for it is he who encompasses all. For him to be out of sync means that there is something greater to be out of sync with. God's "power" is inherent to the substance of the universe and is what makes his role that of creator, and as one who encompasses, creates, and oversees all, a creation outwitting him or better able to argue an end is a contradiction. Now, with a God that has a set of rules, or a way of doing things that He has prescribed for his subjects, naturally, there would be a judgment as to who follows what best. In the context of Christianity, it is the object which has drawn closest to God in action, deed, and intent that shall be closest to God in the afterlife. For those that rejected the way of God, there wish shall be fulfilled when they see complete separation from Him.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's the thinking people he created that could also come to their own moral conclusions, and do.[/quote]

Point? Humans come to millions of moral conclusions. Doesn't make any of them automatically right. We all think, have the ability to reason, and the laws of logic thanks to the very miracle of existence, life, mind, and so on, as granted by God. It would be a little hard to assail an invincible, infinite creator with the mind of a mere mortal.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In this instance, I guess you could concur that might does make right. God, in the context of what we're discussing, is again all, oversees all, could control all, encompasses all. There is no power higher than Him. Since morality, as discussed, is an attempt to tap into the very way of God, or the way that God has prescribed, then yes, we are behold to that which created us and set the rules.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In the Divine Comedy, Dante discussed the idea. With God being all that is good, or rather, all that is in sync with Himself, for God to change would indicate a previous imperfection and thus void the idea of total perfection.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I am absolutely certain that, if God exists, and, as in Christianity, is capable of conscious will and absolutely benevolent, then he would not condemn homosexuality. If God condemned it, I would come to the conclusion that He is not benevolent and therefore not worthy of worship... But really, if God exists and isn't benevolent then we are all utterly screwed, so better not even think about that possibility.

[afleitch]

Lots of 'small thinking' going on. I could post one of my long winded explanations which no one ever responds to on here but if you are a Christian and you fully accept the decisions people made for you when the religion was founded on what you have to believe about the notion of god, then you have to accept the 'warts and all' of that god. There is surprisingly little wriggle room even within the various interpretations of Christianity. It would have been so much easier if you'd went with Marcion.

Now when we talk about 'universal morality' we are using a rather grand name for what is essentially human morality which we project as somehow universal. For some Christians this is need to understand the grand scheme of what is 'right' and 'wrong', for other it's about women, and keeping holy days, and whether boys touch their dicks. The decisions we make on this planet sounded pretty damn important to all philosophies when we are the centre of a very small domain with a firmament hanging above us. We know that this is not the case. So why should we assume that our morality, whether it is simply determined by us and our evolutionary drive (as I believe) or given by god is still 'universal'?

If there is even one other life form vaguely like us out there is it just us who get the message? If not, then why are we to assume that human concepts of love, justice etc preached by god apply to other beings? Would this god send someone to talk about ‘love’ if love was not a tangible concept in their world? If it wasn’t, what would he talk about? What if for their existence, as some evolutionary function for example; hate was a better thing to embrace than love. Would he preach hate because it benefits them more than love? What actions and morals are therefore ‘right’ in the universe as a whole? Surely there can be no universal moral code.

What creator god can hand down a moral code of what is right and wrong if morality on this planet appears to be relative never mind any other place where life may exist?

To address Tutu's point, if I'm wrong and there's a hell, whether a literal fire where chemistry is suspended so that my matter can burn infinitely or a metaphorical nothingness or emptyness, then if it's because I'm gay then that's super because it means Michael will be there too.